NAP Development Process

Status

Process

CSR White Papers

Norway has pubished a number of CSR white papers. In the first CSR white paper (Report to the Parliament No 10, 2008-2009), published before the adoption of the UN Guiding Principles, the government expressed expectations that companies respect human rights in all their activities, including children’s, women’s and indigenous peoples rights as formulated in international conventions, including the ILO core conventions. [Norway response to a BHRRC survey]. In the White Paper/Report to the Parliament No. 27, 2013-2014, the government expressed an expectation that all companies assume responsibility for people, societies and the environment that are affected by their activities, including in relation to four key areas: climate and environment, human rights, labour rights and anti-corruption. This white paper focused on state-owned enterprises (the states’ direct ownership) and expressed expectations that companies with state shareholdings respect fundamental human rights as expressed in international conventions, in all their activities and that the enterprises follow up on such issues in relation to their suppliers and business relationships, as well as integrate relevant conditions related to human rights in all their activities and that they conduct relevant due diligence in accordance with the UN Guiding Principles.

Between April and June 2013 (before the drafting phase commenced in November 2013), Mark Taylor, an external consultant from Fafo Research Foundation, conducted a mapping and gap analysis of government performance in relation to business and human rights. (See section: NBA).

The drafting process was coordinated by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, supported by the inter-ministerial group responsible for the drafting process. The process involved all ministries, with particularly strong engagement from:

The Ministry of Trade;

The Industry and Fisheries;

The Ministry of Finance; and

The Ministry of Justice.

The NAP was published on 12 October 2015 by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Stakeholder Participation

According to information provided by Norway in its reply to the BHRRC survey, “several series of consultations, both multi-stakeholder and separate meetings with business, civil society and indigenous peoples’ representatives, have proven invaluable.”

However it seems that ‘Kompakt’ played the main consulting role . This was the key forum for stakeholder consultations as a body, including various stakeholders engaged with responsible business conduct. Members of ‘Kompakt’, led by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, are appointed for a two year period and represent the authorities, the private sector, trade unions, civil society and academia. In February 2013, the government responded to a request by the working group of Kompakt (in Norweigan), by formulating a NAP. The government commissioned mapping and gap analysis as a first step, which was also intended to be an input into the eventual NAP. Following the change of government in September 2013, a decision was made to proceed with the NAP. They were consulted in regard to the analysis created by an independent consultant in 2013.

Transparency

National Baseline Assessment (NBA)

After the Norwegian government decided to develop an action plan for national implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, a mapping and gap analysis was conducted as a contribution to that effort.

The Norwegian government hired Mark Taylor from the FAFO Institute for Applied International Studies to conduct gap analysis.

The mapping was carried out in line with the Terms of referenceduring the course of 8 weeks by one person. It was conducted through interviews with officials from various ministries and government institutions, including the Ministry of Labour, the Ministry of Children, Equality and Social Inclusion, the Ministry of Government Administration, Reform and Church Affairs, the Ministry of Industry and Trade, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The relevant White Papers, official strategy documents, laws and regulations and ministries’ web pages were also analysed as part of the mapping. Follow-up interviews were conducted by email and telephone. A selection of texts from the interviews and email correspondence are included in the mapping section of the report. Interviews were also conducted with representatives of NGOs, including Amnesty International Norway, Fellesforbundet (a trade union), Forum for Environment and Development, the Norwegian Peace Association, LO (the principle trade union federation) and NHO (the principle association of employers). The study consists of two parts: a survey of Norwegian public bodies and their relevance to business and human rights, and the identification of the gaps between Norwegian state practice and the standards set out in the UN Guiding Principles.

Follow-up, monitoring, reporting and review

The NAP states that each relevant ministry will be responsible for assessing the need for legislative amendments and other measures in its area of expertise. An inter-ministerial working group (headed by Ministry of Foreign Affairs) is to be appointed to assess the need for follow-up of international decisions and to ensure coordinated implementation of the action plan.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs also held several events on the NAP and what it means for business, including with regards to human rights due diligence. For example, it held an event on October 12, 2015 together with the Federation of Norwegian businesses (NHO) and a seminar on November 12th, 2015 with the Norwegian NCP OECD and Ethical Trading Initiative (Norway).

The intention behind these events was to start a dialogue between the government, business and civil society on how to implement the UNGPs.

Explore NAP by Issue

Children’s rights

2. The State duty to protect human rights

2.3 State ownership and practice for supprting the business sector

Responsible management [page 22]:

Norges Bank has chosen to focus on certain areas in order to achieve the best and most effective risk management and exercise of ownership rights. At present the bank has three focus areas that are directly linked with environmental and social conditions: children’s rights, climate change and water management.

3. The Corporate responsibility to respect human rights,

Principle no. 12 [page 31]:

Internationally recognised human rights are those set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, the two 1966 International Covenants, on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and on Political and Civil Rights, and the ILO core conventions. In some cases, other standards may also be applicable, such as the rights of women, indigenous peoples, national, ethnic or linguistic minorities, children, people with disabilities, or foreign workers and their families.

…

4.2 Non-state-based grievance mechanisms [page 41]:

Norway has a number of well-functioning institutions such as the Labour Inspection Authority, the Ombudsman for Children. (…) There are also complaints mechanisms in connection with the rights of employees, children, women and men.

Conflict-affected areas

Section 2.3: State ownership and practice for supporting the business sector

Responsible management [page 23]:

Another criterion concerns serious violations of individual rights in war or other conflict situations. In 2014, the council reviewed a number of cases of human rights violations in connection with extraction of natural resources, agriculture, food production and textile manufacturing.It follows from the mandate from the Ministry of Finance to Norges Bank that in certain cases the GPFG is prevented from investing in government bonds. The GPFG is not a foreign policy instrument, and only in special cases of comprehensive international sanctions or measures that Norway has endorsed, has such restrictions been imposed on investing in government bonds.

…

Section 2.6 Human Rights in Conflict Areas

Companies themselves have a responsibility to identify serious risks connected with areas that have been or are affected by conflict. There is an increasing demand from the business sector for dialogue and cooperation with the public authorities on security, risk assessment and corruption in conflict areas and demanding markets in these areas. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is the contact point for companies in matters of security abroad.[paragraph 1, page 26]

…the same section lists measures undertaken or planned by Norway regarding conflict affected areas [page 26], which include: “Strengthen the dialogue with the business sector through the missions abroad on the risks associated with human rights violations, security concerns and corruption in conflict areas.

Section 3.2 Responsible Business Conduct[page 32]:

Political unrest and conflict entail a particularly high risk of human rights abuses. Companies that operate in such areas should therefore exercise particular due diligence if they are to avoid becoming involved in such abuses. A typical example is abuses perpetrated by security personnel hired to protect the company. There is also a higher risk of corruption, illegal transactions, sexual abuse and other forms of violence against civilians.

…

Compliance with Legislation [page 36]:

In some geographical areas, such as conflict-affected areas, a company may unintentionally enter into a business relationship with an enterprise, such as a security company, that is guilty of gross human rights abuses. In such a situation, the Norwegian company should be aware that this may have legal consequences such as liability. The Norwegian Penal Code of 2005, which entered into force on 1 October 2015, also applies to certain punishable offences committed on behalf of an enterprise registered in Norway when the offence is also punishable under the law of the country where it has been committed.

Responsibility to Respect Human Rights page 31]:

In cases of armed conflict companies should respect the standards laid down in international humanitarian law.

Construction sector

Corporate law & corporate governance

Summary [page 8]:

Norway already has sound legislation for safe guarding human rights. In many fields processes have already been started and changes made that are relevant to UN and OECD instruments, for example the Government’s state ownership policy, corporate governance of the Government Pension Fund Global and a number of measures implemented by diplomatic and consular missions.

1. Global developments and CSR

1.3 CSR in the Norwegian business sector [page 10]:

The Norwegian Corporate Governance Board (NUES) has published recommendations that have to be followed by all companies listed on the Oslo Stock Exchange.

2. The State Duty to Protect Human Rights

GP3 [page 18]:

In meeting their duty to protect, States should: (…) Ensure that other laws and policies governing the creation and ongoing operation of business enterprises, such as corporate law, do not constrain but enable business respect for human rights.

Corruption

1.1 Developing an International Framework for CSR [pages 12-13]:

There is an increasing trend for international organisations, individual countries and civil society to establish partnerships and cooperation with companies. The UN Global Compact is one such initiative. This is a network-based organisation that works with business enterprises. The enterprises are committed to aligning their strategies and operations with 10 principles in the areas of human rights, labour, environment and anti-corruption….

Many Norwegian enterprises operate in new markets in weak states with poorly developed legislation or a poor capacity to enforce human rights legislation. Such companies are requesting advice and cooperation on CSR and related subjects such as security, risks and corruption.

The NAP provides examples of measures taken to address this risk, which includes: [page 21]: “strengthen guidance and dialogue with companies on human rights, business ethics, security and corruption in especially demanding markets.”

The information on the company and the project for which support has been requested is assessed on the basis of a red flag checklist and a checklist based on the 10 principles of the UN Global Compact and adapted to Innovation Norway’s mandate and target groups. The red flags are: risk of corruption, the nature of the company’s activities in low-cost countries, ethical dilemmas and environmental pressure from commercial activities. CSR scores reflect the level of CSR-related risk connected with the project or whether CSR may be a reason for giving the case priority. One of the conditions laid down in the contract with the client is that the enterprise must have high ethical standards and avoid contributing to corruption, human rights violations, poor working conditions or adverse impacts on local communities or the environment.

2.6 Human Rights in Conflict Affected Areas [page 26]:

Companies themselves have a responsibility to identify serious risks connected with areas that have been or are affected by conflict. There is an increasing demand from the business sector for dialogue and cooperation with the public authorities on security, risk assessment and corruption in conflict areas and demanding markets in these areas.

The NAP then provides examples of measures to address human rights in conflict affected areas [page 26], namely: “strengthen the dialogue with the business sector through the missions abroad on the risks associated with human rights violations, security concerns and corruption in conflict areas” and “strengthen project cooperation with the business sector on ethics, security and corruption.”

…

Responsible Business Conduct [page 32]:

Political unrest and conflict entail a particularly high risk of human rights abuses. Companies that operate in such areas should therefore exercise particular due diligence if they are to avoid becoming involved in such abuses. A typical example is abuses perpetrated by security personnel hired to protect the company. There is also a higher risk of corruption, illegal transactions, sexual abuse and other forms of violence against civilians.

Development finance institutions

Environment & climate change

1. Global developments and CSR

1.1.Developing an international framework for CSR [page 13]

Promoting human rights is directly and indirectly linked with environmental protection, climate and anti-corruption efforts. For example, the right to health can be affected by hazardous substances and air, soil and water pollution. Measures to prevent deforestation and forest degradation can safeguard the climate and at the same time promote the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities.

1.3. CSR in the Norwegian business sector [page 14]

The Business for Peace Foundation promotes business practices that contribute to sustainable development.

2. The State Duty to Protect Human Rights

2.1 The State as legislator [page 18]

In 2014, a number of human rights were also enshrined in the Norwegian Constitution. The duty of business enterprises to respect human rights is set out in Norwegian legislation, for example in the Working Environment Act,… and the Environmental Information Act. In addition there are acts regulating other areas that may have consequences for human rights, such as the Nature Diversity Act, the Pollution Control Act and the Greenhouse Gas Emission Trading Act. These are intended to contribute to a stable climate and a healthy environment, and to help safeguard the right to health.

3. The Corporate responsibility to respect human rights

3.2 Responsible Business Conduct [pages 31-32]

An enterprise may cause or contribute to adverse human rights impacts if for example …the living conditions of the local community that are directly affected by the company’s operations decline without prior explanation from or dialogue with the relevant parties, including the local authorities. Impacts on the climate and the environment resulting from the enterprise’s activities, for example through land use, exploitation of natural resources, greenhouse gas emissions or releases of hazardous substances, may also have adverse impacts on a broader range of human rights, such as minority and indigenous people’s rights or the right to life, health, food, water or adequate housing. If a company is responsible for such impacts, it is also responsible for addressing them.

Equality & non-discrimination

1. Global developments and CSR

1.2 Human Rights and States Obligations [page 13]

Human rights are the fundamental rights of the individual that apply irrespective of race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other belief, property, birth and other factors. It is the state’s duty to protect human rights, both by avoiding human rights abuses themselves and ensuring that human rights are respected by private parties under their jurisdiction. Protection of human rights is laid down in international agreements and customary international law, which is binding on states. Any violation of these rights by a state is considered to be a violation of international law.

2. The State Duty to Protect Human Rights

2.1 The State as legislator[page 18]

In 2014, a number of human rights were also enshrined in the Norwegian Constitution. The duty of business enterprises to respect human rights is set out in Norwegian legislation, for example…the Gender Equality Act.

Export credit

Principle 4 concerns the business activities of stateowned enterprises and enterprises that receive economic support or other services from state agencies:

4. States should take additional steps to protect against human rights abuses by business enterprises that are owned or controlled by the State, or that receive substantial support and services from State agencies such as export credit agencies and official investment insurance or guarantee agencies, including, where appropriate, by requiring human rights due diligence.

…

Conditions for government support for business promotion and private sector development section, [page 23]:

“The state is responsible for exercising due diligence when it provides significant economic support or other types of benefits to the business sector. This particularly affects the Norwegian Export Credit Guarantee Agency (GIEK), Export Credit Norway, Innovation Norway, Norad and the Foreign Service. The expectation that companies will observe a high standard of CSR reduces the risk that those that receive credit, loans or other financial support fail to respond correctly in difficult situations, which would affect Norway’s credibility and reputation as well as that of the company concerned. Responsible business conduct also constitutes a competitive advantage.”

GIEK and Export Credit Norway often provide financing for the same projects, and have established formal cooperation on CSR. The cooperation includes human rights due diligence based on the expectations of export credit institutions set by the UN Guiding Principles, and is an integrated part of GIEK’s and Export Credit Norway’s loan and guarantee activities.

Extractives sector

2.1 The state as a legislator: The Minerals Acts [page 19]:

In Norway as in other countries, conflicts may arise between commercial activity and indigenous peoples’ rights. Protection of Sami rights is laid down in the Constitution and other legislation, and obligations towards the Sami people follow from international conventions, particularly Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and ILO Convention 169 concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries. In Norway, Sami rights are also enshrined in special legislation and through consultation procedures between the public authorities and Sámediggi (the Sami Parliament). As part of its follow-up of ILO Convention 169, Norway is conducting a dialogue with ILO on how the convention is being implemented in Norwegian law, including in the area of mineral resources. In the Official Norwegian Report 2007:13 on legislation pertaining to the Sami, the Sami Rights Commission reviewed measures relating to mineral resources and in legislation that regulates mineral extraction. Some of the commission’s proposals were evaluated in connection with the preparatory work on the Minerals Act. The Act, which replaced five existing acts, entered into force on 1 January 2010. As part of the Government’s follow-up of the report from the Sami Rights Commission, the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries will evaluate proposals for amendments to the Minerals Act.

…

2.1: Regulations on country-by-country reporting:

Under the country-by-country reporting regulations, large enterprises that are required to submit accounts, and issuers of financial instruments listed on the stock exchange, in the extractive industry and/or forestry and logging, are required to prepare and publish an annual report on their activities by country and by project.

Extraterritorial jurisdiction

Finance & banking sector

2. The State duty to protect human rights

Responsible Management [page 22]. “Through the Government Pension Fund Global (GPFG) and the Government Pension Fund Norway (GPFN), Norway has financial investments both in Norway and the world at large. The role of the Fund is that of a financial investor, and the overriding objective is to achieve the highest possible return at moderate risk.

We also play an active role in the UN, the OECD, the multilateral financial institutions and the regional development banks.

[..]The operational responsibility for management of the GPFG and the GPFN lies with Norges Bank and Folketrygdfondet respectively, which operate in accordance with mandates decided by the Ministry of Finance. In the management mandate set by the Ministry it is stated that a good long-term return is considered dependent on sustainable development in economic, environmental and social terms, as well as well-functioning legitimate and efficient markets. [..] Norges Bank’s responsible investment management is, as a starting point, based on international principles and standards, such as those set by the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the OECD in the Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. When the UN Guiding Principles were adopted, Norges Bank endorsed a campaign by investors in support of the principles.

Forced labour & modern slavery

The ILO Core Conventions [page 31]:

The eight ILO core conventions provide a globally recognised framework for what constitutes a decent working life. The conventions are of key importance for the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, the UN Global Compact and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. They include the following areas: (…) The elimination of forced or compulsory labour (Convention No. 29 on Forced Labour, and Convention No. 105 on the Abolition of Forced Labour).

Freedom of association

ILO Core Conventions [page 31]:

Freedom of association (Convention No. 87 on Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise, and Convention No. 98 on the Application of the Principles of the Right to Organise and to Bargain Collectively).

Gender & women’s rights

2. The State duty to protect human rights

2.1 The State as Legislator[paragraph 1, page 18]

“The duty of business enterprises to respect human rights is set out in Norwegian legislation, for example in the Working Environment Act, the Gender Equality Act and the Environmental Information Act.

2.6 Human rights in conflict areas [Paragraph 2, page 26]:

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is the contact point for companies in matters of security abroad. The dialogue on the risk of gender-based and sexual abuses will be intensified where appropriate.

…

The 12th Principle [page 31]:

Internationally recognised human rights’ are those set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, the two 1966 International Covenants, on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and on Political and Civil Rights, and the ILO core conventions. In some cases other standards may also be applicable, such as the rights of women, indigenous peoples, national, ethnic or linguistic minorities, children, people with disabilities, or foreign workers and their families.

…

The ILO Core Conventions [page 31]:

The elimination of discrimination (Convention No. 100 on Equal Remuneration for Men and Women Workers for Work of Equal Value, and Convention No. 111 on Discrimination in Respect of Employment and Occupation).

…

4. Access to remedy

4.2 Non-state-based grievance machanism [page 41]

Norway has a number of well-functioning institutions such as the Labour Inspection Authority, the Ombudsman for Children, the Consumer Ombudsman, the Equality and Anti-discrimination Ombudsman, the Norwegian Environment Agency and the Parliamentary Ombudsman for the Public Administration. There are also complaints mechanisms in connection with the rights of employees, children, women and men.

Guidance to business

2. State Duty to Protect Human Rights

2.2 The State as Adviser [page 20]:

A large number of public or officially supported institutions that work with business internationalisation provide guidance on CSR and human rights. Among them are the Foreign Service, Norad, the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries, and Innovation Norway. Norway’s OECD National Contact Point also provides information and guidance.

…

Measures [page 21]

The Norwegian NAP highlights the intention to “improve the level of competence on the UN Guiding Principles and the OECD Guidelines among the public bodies that offer guidance on CSR; strengthen guidance and dialogue with companies on human rights, business ethics, security and corruption in especially demanding markets.”

…

Conditions for Government Support for Business Promotion and Private Sector Development – Measures [page 24]

The Norwegian NAP notes the intention to “give companies with international operations that apply for public funding or services adequate and coherent information and guidance on the Government’s expectations concerning respect for human rights.”

…

2.5 Public Procurement [page 25]:

The Government has held a public consultation on a proposed amendment to section 6 of the Procurement Act to include a provision stating that contracting authorities should have adequate procedures for ensuring social responsibility in connection with public procurement. The Agency for Public Management and Government (DIFI) provides guidance on such matters.

…

2.9 International Cooperation on CSR [page 27]:

States should harmonize their expectations in international forums that support, enter into partnerships with and provide guidance to enterprises. Norway is therefore working for the integration of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises into the OECD framework for export financing.

Human rights due diligence

3. The Corporate responsibility to respect human rights

Due diligence [page 33]:

In order to identify, prevent, mitigate and account for how they address their adverse human rights impacts, business enterprises should carry out human rights due diligence. The process should include assessing actual and potential human rights impacts, integrating and acting upon the findings, tracking responses, and communicating how impacts are addressed. Human rights due diligence:

(a) Should cover adverse human rights impacts that the business enterprise may cause or contribute to through its own activities, or which may be directly linked to its operations, products or services by its business relationships;

(b) Will vary in complexity with the size of the business enterprise, the risk of severe human rights impacts, and the nature and context of its operations;

(c) Should be ongoing, recognizing that the human rights risks may change over time as the business enterprise’s operations and operating context evolve.

Norwegian NAP refers to HRDD also in following sections:

The Government’s expectations of business enterprise [page 9]:

Business enterprises have an independent responsibility under the UN Guiding Principles to respect human rights by developing a public strategy or policy, exercising due diligence and helping to ensure a consultation and remediation process for individuals and communities affected by their activities. (…) In brief, the Government expects business enterprises to: (…) exercise due diligence and assess the human rights-related risks in the context of their operations. This applies particularly to enterprises that operate in demanding markets.

GIEK and Export Credit Norway often provide financing for the same projects, and have established formal cooperation on CSR. The cooperation includes human rights due diligence based on the expectations of export credit institutions set by the UN Guiding Principles, and is an integrated part of GIEK’s and Export Credit Norway’s loan and guarantee activities. All projects for which financing is being considered are submitted to an internal risk classification, even projects where this is not required by the OECD Recommendation of the Council on Common Approaches for Officially Supported Export Credits and Environmental and Social Due Diligence. On the basis of the risk classification and considerations relating to opportunities for exerting influence, appropriate measures are taken to avoid, reduce and/or remedy potentially negative outcomes. In markets where there is a high risk that human rights will not be safeguarded in connection with business operations, it may be logical for example to require business enterprises to have adequate systems and strategies for risk assessment and follow-up. Innovation Norway practises environmental and social due diligence when dealing with all financing applications from business enterprises. The information on the company and the project for which support has been requested is assessed on the basis of a red flag checklist and a checklist based on the 10 principles of the UN Global Compact and adapted to Innovation Norway’s mandate and target groups.

The red flags are: risk of corruption, the nature of the company’s activities in low-cost countries, ethical dilemmas and environmental pressure from commercial activities. CSR scores reflect the level of CSR-related risk connected with the project or whether CSR may be a reason for giving the case priority. One of the conditions laid down in the contract with the client is that the enterprise must have high ethical standards and avoid contributing to corruption, human rights violations, poor working conditions or adverse impacts on local communities or the environment.

The Corporate responsibility to respect human rights with regards to conflict areas [page 32]: Political unrest and conflict entail a particularly high risk of human rights abuses. Companies that operate in such areas should therefore exercise particular due diligence if they are to avoid becoming involved in such abuses.

Human rights impact assessments

3.2 Responsible business conduct

Integrating And Managing The Finding From Due Diligence Process And Risk Analyses [page 34]:

The 19th principle concerns how companies should follow up the findings of the impact assessments: 19. In order to prevent and mitigate adverse human rights impacts, business enterprises should integrate the findings from their impact assessments across relevant internal functions and processes, and take appropriate action.

ICT & electronics sector

Indigenous peoples

1. Global developments and CSR

1.1.Developing an international framework for CSR [page 13]

Measures to prevent deforestation and forest degradation can safeguard the climate and at the same time promote the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities.

2. The State Duty to Protect Human Rights

2.1 The State as legislator

The Minerals Act [page 19]

In Norway as in other countries, conflicts may arise between commercial activity and indigenous peoples’ rights. Protection of Sami rights is laid down in the Constitution and other legislation, and obligations towards the Sami people follow from international conventions, particularly Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and ILO Convention 169 concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries. In Norway, Sami rights are also enshrined in special legislation and through consultation procedures between the public authorities and Sámediggi (the Sami Parliament). As part of its follow-up of ILO Convention 169, Norway is conducting a dialogue with ILO on how the convention is being implemented in Norwegian law, including in the area of mineral resources. In the Official Norwegian Report 2007:13 on legislation pertaining to the Sami, the Sami Rights Commission reviewed measures relating to mineral resources and in legislation that regulates mineral extraction. Some of the commission’s proposals were evaluated in connection with the preparatory work on the Minerals Act. The Act, which replaced five existing acts, entered into force on 1 January 2010. As part of the Government’s follow-up of the report from the Sami Rights Commission,13 the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries will evaluate proposals for amendments to the Minerals Act.

3. The Corporate responsibility to respect human rights

3.2 Responsible Business Conduct [pages 31-32]

An enterprise may cause or contribute to adverse human rights impacts if for example …the living conditions of the local community that are directly affected by the company’s operations decline without prior explanation from or dialogue with the relevant parties, including the local authorities. Impacts on the climate and the environment resulting from the enterprise’s activities, for example through land use, exploitation of natural resources, greenhouse gas emissions or releases of hazardous substances, may also have adverse impacts on a broader range of human rights, such as minority and indigenous people’s rights or the right to life, health, food, water or adequate housing. If a company is responsible for such impacts, it is also responsible for addressing them.

Acquiring expertise for risk identification and assessment [page 33]

The 18th principle outlines procedures for risk management based on internal or external expertise and dialogue with stakeholders:

It may be necessary to conduct a dialogue on due diligence with stakeholders. This will give the company a better picture of which rights may be under pressure and what can be done to prevent potential misunderstandings or conflicts. Dialogue can help to clarify expectations and reduce conflict.

The Rights of Indigenous People [page 34]

Indigenous peoples have a right to be consulted on projects that will have an impact on land where they live and earn their livelihoods (for example reindeer husbandry). The most important international standards concerning indigenous rights and the right to be consulted are the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and ILO Convention No. 169 on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries. In many countries, indigenous peoples are largely excluded from political, economic and cultural life, and indigenous groups have a lower score than other population groups on many standard-of-living indicators, for example health and education. Indigenous peoples are also particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change.

Investment treaties & investor-state dispute settlements

2. The State duty to protect human rights

2.8 Free-trade Agreements and Investment Contracts[page 26]:

States should maintain adequate domestic policy space to meet their human rights obligations when pursuing business-related policy objectives with other States or business enterprises, for instance through investment treaties or contracts.

Responsible management [page 22]:

Through the Government Pension Fund Global (GPFG) and the Government Pension Fund Norway (GPFN), Norway has financial investments both in Norway and the world at large. The role of the Fund is that of a financial investor, and the overriding objective is to achieve the highest possible return at moderate risk…The GPFG is not a foreign policy instrument, and only in special cases of comprehensive international sanctions or measures that Norway has endorsed, has such restrictions been imposed on investing in government bonds.

Judicial remedy

3. The Corporate responsibility to respect human rights

3.5 Compliance with legislation [page 36]:

In some geographical areas, such as conflict-affected areas, a company may unintentionally enter into a business relationship with an enterprise, such as a security company, that is guilty of gross human rights abuses. In such a situation the Norwegian company should be aware that this may have legal consequences such as liability. The Norwegian Penal Code of 2005, which entered into force on 1 October 2015, also applies to certain punishable offences committed on behalf of an enterprise registered in Norway when the offence is also punishable under the law of the country where it has been committed.

Norwegian companies that are faced with demands from the authorities in the host country that appear to be in conflict with international guidelines are encouraged to contact either the nearest Norwegian mission or the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Examples of such situations are a demand for a bribe or a request to keep certain information secret.

26. States should take appropriate steps to ensure the effectiveness of domestic judicial mechanisms when addressing business-related human rights abuses, including considering ways to reduce legal, practical and other relevant barriers that could lead to a denial of access to remedy.

Norway has comprehensive human rights legislation and legislation in other areas that is also applicable to CSR. We also have an effective judicial system, and the Norwegian law of damages provides for financial compensation or redress under certain conditions.

Norwegian companies may become involved in legal cases dealing with human rights abuses in the host country. If the case is to be brought before a Norwegian court, it must satisfy the requirement in the Dispute Act that the facts of the case ‘have a sufficiently strong connection to Norway’. In order to determine whether the connection is sufficiently strong, an overall evaluation must be made of all the circumstances in the case that includes both judicial and other relevant circumstances. There are also other conditions for bringing a case before a Norwegian court.

It is important to ensure that individuals who feel that their rights have been violated have access to effective remedy. The Government will actively follow the international efforts to strengthen access to judicial grievance mechanisms at the national level.

The measures listed in the NAP regarding judicial remedy include [page 40]:

“Participate in international cooperation to ensure that victims of grave and systematic human rights violations as a result of business activities have access to effective remedy;

Support the work headed by OHCHR to strengthen national judicial systems to protect the rights of the victims of grave and systematic human rights violations;

Participate in the process in the Council of Europe on following up the recommendations of the UN Guiding Principles on access to effective remedies at national level.”

Land

3. The Corporate responsibility to respect human rights

3.2 Responsible Business Conduct [pages 31-32]

An enterprise may cause or contribute to adverse human rights impacts if for example …the living conditions of the local community that are directly affected by the company’s operations decline without prior explanation from or dialogue with the relevant parties, including the local authorities. Impacts on the climate and the environment resulting from the enterprise’s activities, for example through land use, exploitation of natural resources, greenhouse gas emissions or releases of hazardous substances, may also have adverse impacts on a broader range of human rights, such as minority and indigenous people’s rights or the right to life, health, food, water or adequate housing. If a company is responsible for such impacts, it is also responsible for addressing them.

Migrant workers

3. The Corporate responsibility to respect human rights

The 12th Principle [page 31]:

Internationally recognized human rights’ are those set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, the two 1966 International Covenants, on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and on Political and Civil Rights, and the ILO core conventions. In some cases, other standards may also be applicable, such as the rights of women, indigenous peoples, national, ethnic or linguistic minorities, children, people with disabilities, or foreign workers and their families.

National Human Rights Institutions/ Ombudspersons

4. Access to remedy

4.2 Non-state-based grievance mechanisms [page 41]:

Norway has a number of well-functioning institutions such as the Labour Inspection Authority, the Ombudsman for Children, the Consumer Ombudsman, the Equality and Anti-discrimination Ombudsman, the Norwegian Environment Agency and the Parliamentary Ombudsman for the Public Administration. There are also complaints mechanisms in connection with the rights of employees, children, women and men. For example, on the basis of the Environmental Information Act, the Appeals Board for Environmental Information handles appeals concerning rejected requests from private and public agencies for access to environmental information. The National Contact Point provides information on the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and the UN Guiding Principles. The Contact Point also deals with individual cases independently of the government. In line with the Guidelines, the parties to cases that come before the Contact Point are expected to participate in good faith during the procedure.

Non-financial reporting

2. The State duty to protect human rights

2.1 The state as legislator

The accounting act [page 19]:

Small amendments to Norwegian legislation may be necessary in order to implement the expected new EEA rules corresponding to the new EU Directive (2014/95/EU) on disclosure of non-financial and diversity information by certain large companies and groups, which includes CSR.

Non-judicial grievance mechanisms

27. States should provide effective and appropriate non-judicial grievance mechanisms, alongside judicial mechanisms, as part of a comprehensive State-based system for the remedy of business-related human rights abuse.

Norway has a number of well-functioning institutions such as the Labour Inspection Authority, the Ombudsman for Children, the Consumer Ombudsman, the Equality and Anti-discrimination Ombudsman, the Norwegian Environment Agency and the Parliamentary Ombudsman for the Public Administration. There are also complaints mechanisms in connection with the rights of employees, children, women and men. For example, on the basis of the Environmental Information Act, the Appeals Board for Environmental Information handles appeals concerning rejected requests from private and public agencies for access to environmental information. The National Contact Point provides information on the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and the UN Guiding Principles. The Contact Point also deals with individual cases independently of the government. In line with the Guidelines, the parties to cases that come before the Contact Point are expected to participate in good faith during the procedure.

The criteria are designed to ensure that those for whom the mechanism is intended are aware of it, have confidence in it and are in a position to use it. Companies that establish grievance mechanisms should familiarise themselves with the criteria and seek to satisfy them. The OECD National Contact Point Norway follows these criteria.

OECD National Contact Points

All OECD countries must establish National Contact Points to ensure implementation.

2. The State duty to protect human rights

2.2 The state as Adviser [page 20]:

A large number of public or officially supported institutions that work with business internationalisation provide guidance on CSR and human rights. Among them are the Foreign Service, Norad, the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries, and Innovation Norway. Norway’s OECD National Contact Point also provides information and guidance.

…

Norway’s OECD National Contact Point [page 20]:

As a member of the OECD, Norway is committed to promoting the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. The Guidelines were updated and adopted at the OECD Ministerial Council Meeting in May 2011. All OECD countries must appoint a National Contact Point that in addition to promoting the Guidelines provides on request assistance in specific instances of alleged non-observance of the Guidelines. The Contact Point is not a supervisory or control body, but provides advice and facilitates access to conciliation and mediation procedures. National Contact Points are also mandated to cooperate with each other on promoting the Guidelines. Norway’s Contact Point is appointed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in consultation with the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries and the Ministry of Finance, from candidates proposed by the social partners (the Confederation of Norwegian Enterprise (NHO) and the Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions (LO) and civil society (the Norwegian Forum for Environment and Development).

4. Access to remedy

4.1 State-based grievance mechanisms [page 41]:

The National Contact Point provides information on the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and the UN Guiding Principles. The National Contact Point provides information on the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and the UN Guiding Principles. The Contact Point also deals with individual cases independently of the government. In line with the Guidelines, the parties to cases that come before the Contact Point are expected to participate in good faith during the procedure.

…

Grievance Mechanisms at Company Level [page 41]:

The National Contact Point, in cooperation with enterprises that have made considerable progress in this area, can provide practical advice on the establishment of consultation and grievance mechanisms.

The criteria are designed to ensure that those for whom the mechanism is intended are aware of it, have confidence in it and are in a position to use it. Companies that establish grievance mechanisms should familiarize themselves with the criteria and seek to satisfy them. The OECD National Contact Point Norway follows these criteria.

Persons with disabilities

Policy coherence

2.7 Policy Coherence in the Central Government Administration [page 26]:

The eighth principle deals with the state’s responsibility for ensuring coherence in the central government administration:

8. States should ensure that governmental departments, agencies and other State-based institutions that shape business practices are aware of and observe the State’s human rights obligations when fulfilling their respective mandates, including by providing them with relevant information, training and support.

To strengthen coordination, the Government will establish an interministerial working group headed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to ensure that Norway’s CSR-related positions in international forums are coherent, and that the relevant ministries are notified of international decisions. See also section 2.1, The state as legislator. The Government’s consultative body on matters relating to CSR, KOMpakt, will continue to serve as a forum for regular dialogue at top level between the authorities, the private sector, trade unions, academics and civil society.

Public procurement

States should promote respect for human rights by business enterprises with which they conduct commercial transactions.

Since the UN Guiding Principles and the OECD Guidelines do not distinguish between public-sector and private-sector business conduct, it is important that the state should have high standards. It is not logical to have high expectations of private companies if the state does not set the same expectations for itself. The state is also Norway’s largest purchaser, a fact that was emphasized by companies and organisations in their input to the action plan. For example, in 2013 the public sector purchased goods and services worth NOK 432 billion. The state’s procurement practices should therefore reflect the UN Guiding Principles.

The Government has held a public consultation on a proposed amendment to section 6 of the Procurement Act to include a provision stating that contracting authorities should have adequate procedures for ensuring social responsibility in connection with public procurement. The Agency for Public Management and eGovernment (DIFI) provides guidance on such matters.

Measure:

continue the efforts to develop measures to promote respect for international human rights in public contracts.

Security sector

Strengthen guidance and dialogue with companies on human rights, business ethics, security and corruption in especially demanding markets.

…

2.6 Human Rights in Conflict Areas [page 26]:

There is an increasing demand from the business sector for dialogue and cooperation with the public authorities on security, risk assessment and corruption in conflict areas and demanding markets in these areas… Security personnel hired to protect Norwegian interests, whether private or public, pose a potential problem. States that hire private security guards must ensure that these comply with the state’s obligation to protect against human rights violations. The Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights and the International Code of Conduct for Private Security Service Providers are useful guidelines for private business enterprises on how best to ensure their security.

Small & medium-sized enterprises

State Owned Enterprises/ Public Private Partnerships

2. The State Duty to Protect Human Rights

2.3 State ownership and practice for supporting the business sector

Principle 4 concerns the business activities of state-owned enterprises and enterprises that receive economic support or other services from state agencies:

State ownership [page 21]

In 2014, the Government presented a white paper on the importance of ownership for diversity and value creation (Meld. St. 27 (2013–2014)), which discusses the state’s expectations of enterprises in which it has a direct ownership interest, including expectations based on the UN Guiding Principles. The expectation that state-owned enterprises will exercise CSR is based on the belief that this is desirable in itself and that it helps to maintain the state’s shareholder value. Enterprises are exposed to different levels of risk and face different challenges. This means that they can adapt the “comply or explain” principle and the materiality principle to their own operations. The “comply or explain” principle applies to cases where a company’s practice deviates from the state’s expectations. There may be good reasons for this, and the board of directors must provide a public explanation of the reasons for the lack of compliance. The materiality principle implies that companies work with and report on factors that are of major importance to the way its operations affect people, communities, climate and the environment. The Government has noted that there is a need to focus more strongly on the responsibility of the boards also of enterprises in which the state has an ownership interest and their approach to CSR, including human rights. We believe that greater involvement by company boards will improve risk management and thereby help to maintain shareholder value. The follow-up of CSR and human rights performance is conducted through the owner dialogue in quarterly and/or annual meetings on CSR. In special cases it may be necessary to follow the company’s activities more closely. The work of companies and boards on CSR, including human rights, is taken into account in the election of board members.

Taxation

Trade

1. Global development and CSR [page 12]:

Globalisation is therefore a basically positive process, and over the last 20 years Norway has benefited from global trade. (…) Although Europe and the Nordic countries are our most important trading partners, trade with and investment in Asia, South America and Africa are growing.

1.1 Developing an international framework [page 12]:

The idea behind this is that business is a driving force for globalisation that can help ensure that trade, markets and technology are developed in ways that benefit economies and societies throughout the world.

…

1.4 Purpose of The Action Plan, [page 14]:

Norwegian foreign and development policy is based on promoting democracy, human rights, growth economies that create jobs, a proactive trade policy, sustainable development and an international legal order. We are also intensifying our economic diplomacy efforts by focusing more strongly on trade, energy and climate, and, in our development policy, on private sector development.

…

2.8 Free-trade agreements and investments contracts [page 26]:

Norway is bound by reciprocal obligations through its membership of international trade organisations such as EFTA and WTO. The Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries has the overall responsibility for bilateral free trade agreements (EFTA) and investment contracts, while the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is responsible for WTO negotiations.

…

Measures [page 27]:

Seek to ensure that provisions on respect for human rights, including fundamental workers’ rights, and the environment are included in bilateral free trade and investment agreements.

Workers’ rights

2. The State duty to protect human rights

2.3 State ownership and practice for supporting the business sector

Responsible management [page 23]:

However, it should be emphasized that Norges Bank’s work on responsible management is not confined to these areas. In its annual report on responsible management for 2014 the bank has elaborated on how it deals with a number of other issues and areas as well, including social conditions such as human rights and workers’ rights.

…

2.8 Free-trade agreements and investment contracts

Measures [page 27]:

sSeek to ensure that provisions on respect for human rights, including fundamental workers’ rights, and the environment are included in bilateral free trade and investment agreements.

Explore NAP by UN Guiding Principle

Guiding Principle 1

Introduction [page 8]

Norway already has sound legislation for safeguarding human rights. In many fields processes have already been started and changes made that are relevant to UN and OECD instruments, for example the Government’s state ownership policy, corporate governance of the Government Pension Fund Global and a number of measures implemented by diplomatic and consular missions. The action plan describes what has been done in relevant areas as well as new measures. The UN Guiding Principles emphasise that states have an obligation under international law to protect against human rights abuses by third parties, including business enterprises. The Government attaches importance to the state’s role as legislator, adviser and facilitator. This action plan is intended to ensure coherent practice throughout the public administration.

Guiding Principle 2

The Government’s expectations of business enterprises [page 9]

Business enterprises have an independent responsibility under the UN Guiding Principles to respect human rights by developing a public strategy or policy, exercising due diligence and helping to ensure a consultation and remediation process for individuals and communities affected by their activities.

The responsibility to respect human rights applies independently of where the enterprise operates, but is particularly important if it operates in states that do not themselves ensure respect for human rights. The Guiding Principles are norms and do not have the force of law. It is the duty of the enterprises themselves to decide how and to what extent the Guiding Principles apply to their operations. Such decisions must be based on risk assessments in which respect for human rights is evaluated in the context of the individual enterprise’s activities and resources and the challenges in the place where the enterprise operates. Two principles are relevant here: the “comply or explain” principle and the materiality principle.

2 The Government’s expectations of business enterprises are discussed in more detail in chapter 3.

In brief, the Government expects business enterprises to:

comply with the legislation in the country where it operates;

familiarise themselves with the UN Guiding Principles and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises;

follow the Guiding Principles or the OECD guidelines, where applicable, when developing strategies for responsible business conduct;

exercise due diligence and assess the human rights-related risks in the context of their operations. This applies particularly to enterprises that operate in demanding markets;

follow the “comply or explain” principle and the materiality principle.”

3. The Corporate responsibility to respect human rights [page 30]

“(…) As described in chapter 2, the Norwegian Government has set out clear expectations and in some cases requirements for the business sector in connection with all forms of state support or ownership. (…): The most important factor that a company should consider is whether there is a risk of its becoming implicated in situations where human rights are being violated as a result of its operations. Even small companies may find themselves in such a situation, depending on the nature of their operations. Thus all business enterprises should familiarise themselves with the Guiding Principles and assess the extent to which they are applicable. In cases where the principles do not apply, the government guidelines for enterprises in which the state has an ownership interest recommend that these enterprises should publish, in accordance with the “comply or explain” principle, a report stating why the Guiding Principles are not relevant to its activities. Private companies should do the same.

The Government expects all companies to:

follow the rules and regulations of the country where the company operates;

acquaint themselves with the UN Guiding Principles and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises;

make use where appropriate of the UN Guiding Principles or the OECD Guidelines in the development of their strategies for responsible business conduct;

exercise due diligence and assess the risks of human rights abuses in their area of operation. This applies particularly to companies that operate in demanding markets;

apply the “comply or explain” principle and the materiality principle.

Guiding Principle 3

1.3 CSR in the Norwegian business sector [page 13]

The Norwegian Corporate Governance Board (NUES) has published recommendations that have to be followed by all companies listed on the Oslo Stock Exchange. Another initiative is the Business for Peace Foundation, which promotes business practices that contribute to sustainable development. The social partners have played an active role in the development of decent working conditions, and NGOs have mobilised both business and the public sector to give priority to CSR. There are an increasing number of partnerships between civil society and business, such as the Ethical Trading Initiative Norway (ETI-Norway), which was set up in 2000 by the Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions (LO), Virke, COOP and Norwegian Church Aid.

2. The State duty to protect human rights

2.1 The state as legislator [pages 18-19]

The Norwegian Human Rights Act states that certain key human rights conventions have the force of Norwegian law and take precedence over any other legislative provisions that are in conflict with them. In 2014, a number of human rights were also enshrined in the Norwegian Constitution. The duty of business enterprises to respect human rights is set out in Norwegian legislation, for example in the Working Environment Act, the Gender Equality Act and the Environmental Information Act. In addition there are acts regulating other areas that may have consequences for human rights, such as the Nature Diversity Act, the Pollution Control Act and the Greenhouse Gas Emission Trading Act. These are intended to contribute to a stable climate and a healthy environment, and to help safeguard the right to health. Generally speaking, Norwegian legislation safeguards human rights in Norway, so that companies that operate only in Norway are in little danger of violating these rights as long as they comply with the legislation.

However, although Norway already has in place sound legislation that applies to business, it may be necessary to consider amending certain acts in the light of the Guiding Principles and other international developments. It is often relevant to follow EU action in this field. The action plan therefore provides for review at regular intervals to ensure that legislation keeps pace with international decisions affecting human rights and CSR. Coherent follow-up of principle 8 (see section 2.7 below) should also be ensured. The Government will therefore appoint an interministerial working group headed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to ensure that such reviews are conducted. The aim of the working group is described in section 2.7.

The following are examples of relevant legislation.

The Accounting Act

Under the Accounting Act, large enterprises have been required to submit reports on CSR since 2013. The provision stipulating that enterprises must take account of human rights is considered to be in line with the Guiding Principles concerning the independent responsibility of enterprises to ensure that they respect human rights.

Amendments to EEA legislation

Small amendments to Norwegian legislation may be necessary in order to implement the expected new EEA rules corresponding to the new EU Directive (2014/95/EU) on disclosure of non-financial and diversity information by certain large companies and groups, which includes CSR. In this context it will be appropriate to look to other international developments, such the new UN Guiding Principles Reporting Framework.

Regulations on country-by-country reporting

Under the country-by-country reporting regulations, large enterprises that are required to submit accounts, and issuers of financial instruments listed on the stock exchange, in the extractive industry and/or forestry and logging, are required to prepare and publish an annual report on their activities by country and by project. The regulations entered into force on 1 January 2014, and will be reviewed after three years.

The Minerals Act

In Norway as in other countries, conflicts may arise between commercial activity and indigenous peoples’ rights. Protection of Sami rights is laid down in the Constitution and other legislation, and obligations towards the Sami people follow from international conventions, particularly Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and ILO Convention 169 concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries. In Norway, Sami rights are also enshrined in special legislation and through consultation procedures between the public authorities and Sámediggi (the Sami Parliament). As part of its follow-up of ILO Convention 169, Norway is conducting a dialogue with ILO on how the convention is being implemented in Norwegian law, including in the area of mineral resources. In the Official Norwegian Report 2007:13 on legislation pertaining to the Sami, the Sami Rights Commission reviewed measures relating to mineral resources and in legislation that regulates mineral extraction. Some of the commission’s proposals were evaluated in connection with the preparatory work on the Minerals Act. The Act, which replaced five existing acts, entered into force on 1 January 2010. As part of the Government’s follow-up of the report from the Sami Rights Commission, the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries will evaluate proposals for amendments to the Minerals Act.

Legislation governing the export of arms, ammunition and other military equipment

Norwegian legislation governing the export of arms, ammunition and other military equipment, associated technology and services for military purposes is strict and comprehensive. It is based on the principle that Norway does not permit such exports to areas where there is war, a threat of war, or countries where there is civil war. The Foreign Ministry’s guidelines recommend that such applications should be rejected in cases where, for example, there is considered to be an unacceptable risk that the equipment to be exported is intended to be used for internal oppression or serious human rights violations. The Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), signed in April 2013, provides guidelines for the regulation of export control by states. The guidelines provide for the possibility that states may have more restrictive practices than those that follow from the ATT, and Norway will continue with its restrictive legislation. At the same time, the Government wishes to continue to provide Norwegian business enterprises with clear, predictable framework conditions for their export operations, for example by providing unambiguous, long-term guidelines for the Foreign Ministry’s processing of applications to export defence materiel. An annual report is submitted to the Storting on the Ministry’s implementation of legislation and guidelines, and on the scale of Norwegian exports of goods and related technology controlled by the EU Munition List.

Measures [page 20]

appoint an interministerial working group to assess the need for follow-up of international decisions and to ensure coordinated implementation of this action plan (see section 2.7 for a more detailed description of the group’s objective and tasks). Each relevant ministry will continue to be responsible for assessing the need for legislative amendments and other measures in its area of expertise;

review the country-by-country reporting regulations for the extractive industry and forestry in 2016–17;

evaluate the amendments to the Minerals Act proposed by the Sami Rights Commission in their report;

continue to practise a strict and predictable control regime for arms exports.

2. The State duty to protect human rights

2.2 The state as adviser [page 20]

A large number of public or officially supported institutions that work with business internationalisation provide guidance on CSR and human rights. Among them are the Foreign Service, Norad, the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries, and Innovation Norway. Norway’s OECD National Contact Point also provides information and guidance.

Although the advice given by these bodies often needs to be adapted to the context and situation of the individual company, the question of whether the various bodies’ advice is consistent should be examined. The Government’s goal is that Norwegian enterprises should encounter the same expectations regardless of which public authority they come in contact with, and the business sector expressed a desire for coherence in this respect in its input to the action plan. Such a review would also satisfy the terms of the white paper Human Rights in Opportunities for All: Human Rights in Norway’s Foreign Policy and Development Cooperation (Meld. St. 10 (2014–2015)).

The Government will therefore consider establishing a centre where the resources of several advisory bodies would be co-located. Such a centre would help to ensure coherence and best practice, and serve as a direct resource for companies. The secretariat of Norway’s OECD Contact Point, which is an important source of information, would be co-located in this centre.

There is also a need to raise the level of competence on international decisions in the public administration, and especially in public bodies that offer courses and training in business internationalisation.

Many Norwegian enterprises operate in new markets in weak states with poorly developed legislation or a poor capacity to enforce human rights legislation. Such companies are requesting advice and cooperation on CSR and related subjects such as security, risks and corruption. The diplomatic and consular missions and Innovation Norway in particular will be strengthening their capacity for advice and dialogue on such subjects.

In order to ensure that advice and guidance on CSR and human rights are relevant and up to date, the Government will continue the dialogue with the social partners and civil society, especially in KOMpakt, the Government’s Consultative body on matters relating ro CSR.

Under the UN Guiding Principles, the state has a particular responsibility for advising business enterprises in conflict-affected areas. This is described in more detail in section 2.6.

Measures

consider establishing a centre for co-locating the resources of a number of public bodies that provide advice on CSR;14

improve the level of competence on the UN Guiding Principles and the OECD Guidelines among the public bodies that offer guidance on CSR;

strengthen guidance and dialogue with companies on human rights, business ethics, security and corruption in especially demanding markets;

continue the work on CSR by KOMpakt, the Government’s Consultative body on matters relating ro CSR

3.2 Responsible business conduct [page 32]

“Norwegian companies should be aware that the UN Guiding Principles also include a responsibility to seek to prevent or reduce activities by their business relationships that have adverse human rights impacts. Examples of business relationships are subcontractors, enterprises the company has invested in, and business partners. However, the principles also emphasise that this does not mean that the company is complicit in the detrimental activities of its business relationships. They encourage companies to use their influence to mitigate the adverse impacts of such activities.

Guiding Principle 4

2.The State duty to protect human rights

2.3 State ownership and practice for supporting the business sector [pages 21-24]

Direct state ownership in multinational enterprises is relatively extensive in Norway. We also have the world’s largest sovereign wealth fund, the Government Pension Fund Global, which is invested in around 9000 enterprises worldwide.

State ownership

In 2014, the Government presented a white paper on the importance of ownership for diversity and value creation (Meld. St. 27 (2013–2014)), which discusses the state’s expectations of enterprises in which it has a direct ownership interest, including expectations based on the UN Guiding Principles. The expectation that state-owned enterprises will exercise CSR is based on the belief that this is desirable in itself and that it helps to maintain the state’s shareholder value. Enterprises are exposed to different levels of risk and face different challenges. This means that they can adapt the “comply or explain” principle and the materiality principle to their own operations. The “comply or explain” principle applies to cases where a company’s practice deviates from the state’s expectations. There may be good reasons for this, and the board of directors must provide a public explanation of the reasons for the lack of compliance. The materiality principle implies that companies work with and report on factors that are of major importance to the way its operations affect people, communities, climate and the environment.

The Government has noted that there is a need to focus more strongly on the responsibility of the boards also of enterprises in which the state has an ownership interest and their approach to CSR, including human rights. We believe that greater involvement by company boards will improve risk management and thereby help to maintain shareholder value. The follow-up of CSR and human rights performance is conducted through the owner dialogue in quarterly and/or annual meetings on CSR. In special cases it may be necessary to follow the company’s activities more closely. The work of companies and boards on CSR, including human rights, is taken into account in the election of board members.

Responsible management

Through the Government Pension Fund Global (GPFG) and the Government Pension Fund Norway (GPFN), Norway has financial investments both in Norway and the world at large. The role of the Fund is that of a financial investor, and the overriding objective is to achieve the highest possible return at moderate risk.

Under the GPFG investment strategy, 60 % of the capital is invested in equities, 35 % in bonds and up to 5 % in real estate. The GPFG may not own more than 10 % of any single company in its portfolio. The investment strategy for the GPFG has been expressed, inter alia, through benchmark indices. Its benchmark indices for equities and bonds are based on broad and easily available indices from leading index providers. Norges Bank may only deviate to a small extent from the benchmarks (1% expected tracking error). The management of the GPFG thus follows closely the broad market indicies as set by the Ministry. This also means that the fund is invested widely and with small holdings in the global markets. At the end of 2014, the fund’s average holding in the global equity market was 1.3 %. This means that the fund is a minority shareholder in a large number of companies.

The Government attaches importance to transparency and ethics in the management of the Government Pension Fund. In the management of the fund, emphasis is also given to respecting values shared by the beneficial owners of the Fund. Guidelines have been drawn up for observation and exclusion from the GPFG portfolio of companies that contribute to or are responsible for certain gross violations of norms, including human rights violations. Expectations from different perspectives are being expressed on the best way to fulfil the funds` ownership role. However, it is important that the fund keeps to its role as financial investor: there is broad political consensus that the fund is not a foreign or environmental policy tool. The state has other and more effective instruments in these fields.

The Ministry of Finance is responsible for the management of the Government Pension Fund, including the framework of responsible management. The operational responsibility for management of the GPFG and the GPFN lies with Norges Bank and Folketrygdfondet respectively, which operate in accordance with mandates decided by the Ministry of Finance. The Ministry reports to the Storting on the management and on planned changes in the framework in an annual white paper (see e.g. The Management of the Government Pension Fund in 2014 (Meld. St. 21 (2014–2015)).

In the management mandate set by the Ministry it is stated that a good long-term return is considered dependent on sustainable development in economic, environmental and social terms, as well as well-functioning, legitimate and efficient markets. The mandates laid down by the Ministry of Finance to Norges Bank and Folketrygdfondet require that these considerations are integrated into the operational management strategies. Within the framework decided by the Ministry, Norges Bank and Folketrygdfondet make investment decisions and exercise their ownership rights independently of the Ministry.

The work on responsible management is an integrated part of the investment process and Norges Bank uses a variety of tools in its responsible management. They can be divided into three main groups: standard setting, ownership and risk management. Norges Bank’s responsible investment management is, as a starting point, based on international principles and standards, such as those set by the UN in the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the OECD in the Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. When the UN Guiding Principles were adopted, Norges Bank endorsed a campaign by investors in support of the principles.

When Norges Bank assesses markets and country risks, it includes violent conflicts, human rights violations and political terror in its analyses. Human rights may also be a part of the risk monitoring at sector and company level.

In its capacity as owner and minority shareholder in over 9000 companies worldwide (by the end of 2014), Norges Bank has chosen to focus on certain areas in order to achieve the best and most effective risk management and exercise of ownership rights. At present the bank has three focus areas that are directly linked with environmental and social conditions: children’s rights, climate change and water management. It has set out expectations in each of these areas for how companies can manage risks and report on their activities. The expectation documents are publicly available.

In its 2014–2016 strategy document, Norges Bank stated that it may add additional focus areas towards the end of the period. The Ministry of Finance will follow up the Storting’s recommendation to verify with Norges Bank whether an expectation document on human rights can be drawn up, including which areas of human rights can be expected to be included. The Ministry of Finance has asked Norges Bank to respond by 1 February 2016, and will report on the subject in its spring white paper to the Storting on the management of the Government Pension Fund.

However, it should be emphasized that Norges Bank’s work on responsible management is not confined to these areas. In its annual report on responsible management for 2014 the bank has elaborated on how it deals with a number of other issues and areas as well, including social conditions such as human rights and workers’ rights. In recent years the bank has also made risk-based divestments based on an overall financial assessment of companies that includes environmental and social issues. Such divestments are made within the limits set out in the mandate from the Ministry of Finance.

To further strengthen its work on responsible management, in February 2015 Norges Bank presented for the first time a separate report on its activities in this area. The aim of the report is to provide a broad and coherent overview of the bank’s work on assuring responsible management and in this way increasing the transparency of the management of the GPFG. The report is published on http://www.nbim.no/en/.

A system has also been established for observation and exclusion of companies. The system is intended to ensure that the GPFG is not invested in companies that produce certain products or contribute to or are responsible for grossly unethical conduct. The Ministry of Finance has appointed a Council on Ethics to advise Norges Bank on exclusion or observation of companies in the fund’s portfolio on the basis of the criteria in the guidelines for observation and exclusion. The criteria are laid down by the political authorities.

The Council on Ethics can recommend exclusions or observations in cases where there is an unacceptable risk that a company contributes to or is responsible for serious or systematic violations of human rights. The companies are identified by means of, among other things, systematic reviews of sectors or issues, approaches from interest groups and reports in the media. Another criterion concerns serious violations of individual rights in war or other conflict situations. In 2014, the council reviewed a number of cases of human rights violations in connection with extraction of natural resources, agriculture, food production and textile manufacturing.

It follows from the mandate from the Ministry of Finance to Norges Bank that in certain cases the GPFG is prevented from investing in government bonds. The GPFG is not a foreign policy instrument, and only in special cases of comprehensive international sanctions or measures that Norway has endorsed, has such restrictions been imposed on investing in government bonds.

Measure:

The Ministry of Finance has asked Norges Bank to consider whether it can draw up an expectations document for human rights, and which areas of human rights it would consider including, by 1 February 2016. The Ministry will report on this subject in its spring white paper to the Storting on the management of the Government Pension Fund.”

Conditions for government support for business promotion and private sector development

The state is responsible for exercising due diligence when it provides significant economic support or other types of benefits to the business sector. This particularly affects the Norwegian Export Credit Guarantee Agency (GIEK), Export Credit Norway, Innovation Norway, Norad and the Foreign Service. The expectation that companies will observe a high standard of CSR reduces the risk that those that receive credit, loans or other financial support fail to respond correctly in difficult situations, which would affect Norway’s credibility and reputation as well as that of the company concerned. Responsible business conduct also constitutes a competitive advantage.

The Government wishes to expand its cooperation with the business sector in private sector development policy. The cooperation would include financial support for projects with a development effect in particular developing countries, and strategic cooperation between the Norwegian authorities, Norwegian companies and third parties such as the recipient country, multinational institutions or NGOs. In such cases expectations and in some cases requirements will be set for business conduct compatible with the practices of other public institutions.

Measures:

give companies with international operations that apply for public funding or services18 adequate and coherent information and guidance on the Government’s expectations concerning respect for human rights;

expect companies that are to receive financial support or servicesto respect human rights;

continue to classify all export transactions19 for which public funding is sought according to the risk of human rights violations.

“GIEK and Export Credit Norway often provide financing for the same projects, and have established formal cooperation on CSR. The cooperation includes human rights due diligence based on the expectations of export credit institutions set by the UN Guiding Principles, and is an integrated part of GIEK’s and Export Credit Norway’s loan and guarantee activities. All projects for which financing is being considered are submitted to an internal risk classification, even projects where this is not required16 by the OECD Recommendation of the Council on Common Approaches for Officially Supported Export Credits and Environmental and Social Due Diligence.17 On the basis of the risk classification and considerations relating to opportunities for exerting influence, appropriate measures are taken to avoid, reduce and/or remedy potentially negative outcomes. In markets where there is a high risk that human rights will not be safeguarded in connection with business operations, it may be logical for example to require business enterprises to have adequate systems and strategies for risk assessment and follow-up.

Innovation Norway practises environmental and social due diligence when dealing with all financing applications from business enterprises. The information on the company and the project for which support has been requested is assessed on the basis of a red flag checklist and a checklist based on the 10 principles of the UN Global Compact and adapted to Innovation Norway’s mandate and target groups. The red flags are: risk of corruption, the nature of the company’s activities in low-cost countries, ethical dilemmas and environmental pressure from commercial activities. CSR scores reflect the level of CSR-related risk connected with the project or whether CSR may be a reason for giving the case priority. One of the conditions laid down in the contract with the client is that the enterprise must have high ethical standards and avoid contributing to corruption, human rights violations, poor working conditions or adverse impacts on local communities or the environment.

Guiding Principle 5

2. The State duty to protect human rights

2.4 Competitive tendering for public services [page 25]

(…) Examples of public services subject to competitive tendering that may have consequences for human rights are the operation of asylum reception centres, hospitals and schools. The state may also be held responsible for human rights violations if these result from inadequate management or control of private service providers within the state’s sphere of responsibility. The Government considers that Norwegian law and supervisory authorities are adequate for this purpose, and that there is no need for special measures at present.

Guiding Principle 6

2. The State duty to protect human rights

2.5 Public procurement [page 25]

“(…) Since the UN Guiding Principles and the OECD Guidelines do not distinguish between public-sector and private-sector business conduct, it is important that the state should have high standards. It is not logical to have high expectations of private companies if the state does not set the same expectations for itself. The state is also Norway’s largest purchaser, a fact that was emphasised by companies and organisations in their input t o the action plan. For example, in 2013 the public sector purchased goods and services worth NOK 432 billion. The state’s procurement practices should therefore reflect the UN Guiding Principles.

The Government has held a public consultation on a proposed amendment to section 6 of the Procurement Act to include a provision stating that contracting authorities should have adequate procedures for ensuring social responsibility in connection with public procurement. The Agency for Public Management and eGovernment (DIFI) provides guidance on such matters.

Measure:

continue the efforts to develop measures to promote respect for international human rights in public contracts.

Guiding Principle 7

2. The State duty to protect human rights

2.6 Human rights in conflict areas [page 25]

(…) Companies themselves have a responsibility to identify serious risks connected with areas that have been or are affected by conflict. There is an increasing demand from the business sector for dialogue and cooperation with the public authorities on security, risk assessment and corruption in conflict areas and demanding markets in these areas.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is the contact point for companies in matters of security abroad. The dialogue on the risk of gender-based and sexual abuses will be intensified where appropriate. No assistance will be given to companies that are involved in gross human rights violations unless they show a willingness to cooperate on addressing the situation.

Security personnel hired to protect Norwegian interests, whether private or public, pose a potential problem. States that hire private security guards must ensure that these comply with the state’s obligation to protect against human rights violations. The Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights and the International Code of Conduct for Private Security Service Providers are useful guidelines for private business enterprises on how best to ensure their security.

Measures:

strengthen the dialogue with the business sector through the missions abroad on the risks associated with human rights violations, security concerns and corruption in conflict areas;

strengthen project cooperation with the business sector on ethics, security and corruption.

3.2 Responsible business conduct [page 32]

Political unrest and conflict entail a particularly high risk of human rights abuses. Companies that operate in such areas should therefore exercise particular due diligence if they are to avoid becoming involved in such abuses. A typical example is abuses perpetrated by security personnel hired to protect the company. There is also a higher risk of corruption, illegal transactions, sexual abuse and other forms of violence against civilians

Guiding Principle 8

2. The State duty to protect human rights

2.7 Policy coherence in the central government administration [page 26]

To strengthen coordination, the Government will establish an interministerial working group headed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to ensure that Norway’s CSR-related positions in international forums are coherent, and that the relevant ministries are notified of international decisions. See also section 2.1, The state as legislator.

The Government’s consultative body on matters relating to CSR, KOMpakt, will continue to serve as a forum for regular dialogue at top level between the authorities, the private sector, trade unions, academics and civil society.

Guiding Principle 9

2. The State duty to protect human rights

2.8 Free-trade agreements and investment contracts [page 26]

Norway is bound by reciprocal obligations through its membership of international trade organisations such as EFTA and WTO. The Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries has the overall responsibility for bilateral free trade agreements (EFTA) and investment contracts, while the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is responsible for WTO negotiations.

Measure:

seek to ensure that provisions on respect for human rights, including fundamental workers’ rights, and the environment are included in bilateral free trade and investment agreements.

Guiding Principle 10

2. The State duty to protect human rights

2.9 International cooperation on CSR [page 27]

Implementation of the UN Guiding Principles will help to ensure a more level playing field and greater transparency and predictability for enterprises with international investments. States should harmonise their expectations in international forums that support, enter into partnerships with and provide guidance to enterprises. Norway is therefore working for the integration of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises into the OECD framework for export financing.20 We also play an active role in the UN, the OECD, the multilateral financial institutions and the regional development banks.

Measures:

emphasise the importance of business and human rights in the Human Rights Council;

work for the global implementation of the UN Guiding Principles and the OECD Guidelines;

recognising the crucial contribution of business to development, economic growth and job creation, and the fact that states have a duty to protect against human rights abuse, seek to ensure that Norway’s positions in the relevant forums are coherent;

Guiding Principle 11

3.1 Responsibility to respect human rights [page 31]

Under the UN Guiding Principles and the OECD Guidelines, business enterprises have an independent responsibility to respect human rights. This is not a legal requirement. However, most countries have legislation that directly or indirectly protects individuals and vulnerable groups from human rights abuses in connection with business operations. There is thus a global standard for what can be expected of a business enterprise regardless of whether or not the local legislation affords adequate protection for human rights.

Guiding Principle 12

3.1 Responsibility to respect human rights

Companies’ responsibility to respect human rights [page 31]

Internationally recognised human rights’ are those set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, the two 1966 International Covenants, on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and on Political and Civil Rights, and the ILO core conventions. In some cases other standards may also be applicable, such as the rights of women, indigenous peoples, national, ethnic or linguistic minorities, children, people with disabilities, or foreign workers and their families. In cases of armed conflict companies should respect the standards laid down in international humanitarian law.

BOX: The ILO Core Conventions

The eight ILO core conventions provides a globally recognised framework for what constitutes a decent working life. The conventions are of key importance for the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, the UN Global Compact and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. They include the following areas: The abolition of child labour (Convention No. 138 on the Minimum Age for Admission to Employment and Work, and Convention No.182 on the Worst Forms of Child Labour). Freedom of association (Convention No. 87 on Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise, and Convention No. 98 on the Application of the Principles of the Right to Organise and to Bargain Collectively). The elimination of discrimination (Convention No. 100 on Equal Remuneration for Men and Women Workers for Work of Equal Value, and Convention No. 111 on Discrimination in Respect of Employment and Occupation). The elimination of forced or compulsory labour (Convention No. 29 on Forced Labour, and Convention No. 105 on the Abolition of Forced Labour).

Guiding Principle 13

3.2 Responsible Business Conduct [page 31]

An enterprise may cause or contribute to adverse human rights impacts if for example its employees are working under disgraceful conditions or if the living conditions of the local community that are directly affected by the company’s operations decline without prior explanation from or dialogue with the relevant parties, including the local authorities. Impacts on the climate and the environment resulting from the enterprise’s activities, for example through land use, exploitation of natural resources, greenhouse gas emissions or releases of hazardous substances, may also have adverse impacts on a broader range of human rights, such as minority and indigenous people’s rights or the right to life, health, food, water or adequate housing. If a company is responsible for such impacts, it is also responsible for addressing them.

Norwegian companies should be aware that the UN Guiding Principles also include a responsibility to seek to prevent or reduce activities by their business relationships that have adverse human rights impacts. Examples of business relationships are subcontractors, enterprises the company has invested in, and business partners. However, the principles also emphasise that this does not mean that the company is complicit in the detrimental activities of its business relationships. They encourage companies to use their influence to mitigate the adverse impacts of such activities.

Political unrest and conflict entail a particularly high risk of human rights abuses. Companies that operate in such areas should therefore exercise particular due diligence if they are to avoid becoming involved in such abuses. A typical example is abuses perpetrated by security personnel hired to protect the company. There is also a higher risk of corruption, illegal transactions, sexual abuse and other forms of violence against civilians.

Guiding Principle 14

3.2. Responsible Business Conduct

Which companies are the Guiding Principles targeting? [page 32]

The 14th principle states that the recommendations apply to all companies. However, it is clear that more is expected of companies with substantial resources. Relevance and context must also be taken into account.

A company’s capacity to act often depends on its size and whether or not it is one of a group of companies. The Guiding Principles assume that not all companies can be expected to have equally broad strategies and that each company must assess its own capacity.

Guiding Principle 15

3.2. Responsible Business Conduct

What should a company do? [page 32]

The 15th principle specifies ways in which companies can ensure responsible business conduct. Thus, companies must know and show that they respect human rights. This means having sound strategies and management systems. Principles 16–24 describe in more detail points (a), (b) and (c) of the 15th principle.

Guiding Principle 16

3.2. Responsible Business Conduct

How should a company fulfil its responsibility? [page 32]

The 16th principle specifies the ways in which companies can embed respect for human rights in all their activities and publicly express their commitment. Policy statements and operational guidelines provide a practical framework for the company’s activities. The Guiding Principles strongly emphasise that a company’s strategy should be adopted at the most senior level. The Government stressed the responsibility of management in this respect in its white paper on state ownership.

Guiding Principle 17

3.2. Responsible Business Conduct

Guiding Principle 18

3.2. Responsible Business Conduct

Acquiring expertise for risk identification and assessment [page 33]

The 18th principle outlines procedures for risk management based on internal or external expertise and dialogue with stakeholders.

Companies in high-risk industries and companies that operate in vulnerable areas should identify and gauge the risks they run of having adverse human rights impacts. The first step is to identify actual and potential risks. Which specific human rights and individuals do they risk abusing in certain situations? Risk identification and assessment should be conducted and repeated for each new decision and each new direction, such as entry into a new market.

It may be necessary to conduct a dialogue on due diligence with stakeholders. This will give the company a better picture of which rights may be under pressure and what can be done to prevent potential misunderstandings or conflicts. Dialogue can help to clarify expectations and reduce conflict.

BOX: The rights on indigenous people [page 34]

‘Indigenous peoples have a right to be consulted on projects that will have an impact on land where they live and earn their livelihoods (for example reindeer husbandry). The most important international standards concerning indigenous rights and the right to be consulted are the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and ILO Convention No. 169 on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries. In many countries, indigenous peoples are largely excluded from political, economic and cultural life, and indigenous groups have a lower score than other population groups on many standard-of-living indicators, for example health and education. Indigenous peoples are also particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change.

Guiding Principle 20

3.2. Responsible Business Conduct

Measuring the effectiveness of the company’s response [page 34]

The 20th principle concerns follow-up of the action taken. Companies should verify whether the action taken to address human rights impacts has had the intended result. Many companies have reported that they find it difficult to identify appropriate indicators. A number of initiatives in this respect are being taken internationally. Norway has supported the development of a reporting framework for the Guiding Principles to help companies assess the effectiveness of their measures and report on them. This is described in more detail in the following section.

Guiding Principle 21

2. The State duty to protect human rights

2.1 The state as legislator [page 18]

The Accounting Act

Under the Accounting Act, large enterprises have been required to submit reports on CSR since 2013. The provision stipulating that enterprises must take account of human rights is considered to be in line with the Guiding Principles concerning the independent responsibility of enterprises to ensure that they respect human rights.

Amendments to EEA legislation

Small amendments to Norwegian legislation may be necessary in order to implement the expected new EEA rules corresponding to the new EU Directive (2014/95/EU) on disclosure of non-financial and diversity information by certain large companies and groups, which includes CSR. In this context it will be appropriate to look to other international developments, such the new UN Guiding Principles Reporting Framework.

3.3 External communication and reporting [page 34]

The 21st principle deals with internal and external communication. The Guiding Principles also provide further details on how companies should address the human rights impacts of their operations. It is the company itself that decides how to communicate and report on this in the light of its situation and target groups. We recommend companies to use international reporting frameworks, and to have their reports verified by an independent auditor or other expert. It is also important to publish the reports in the language of the country where the company operates. The company itself chooses the most appropriate reporting framework, and the Norwegian authorities can advise on this.

BOX: International Reporting Standards [page 35]

The UN Guiding Principles (UNGP) Reporting Framework was launched in February 2015. It evolved from the Human Rights Reporting and Assurance Frameworks (RAFI) and is co-facilitated by Shift and Mazars. Business was actively involved in the development of the reporting framework, and many companies began using it during the development process. The High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), and the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, have expressed their support for the project but are not involved in it. Norway has supported the project. www.ungpreporting.org

United Nations Global Compact requires its members to report on their efforts to implement its 10 principles in four areas: human rights, labour, environment and anti-corruption. Enterprises’ reports are graded as GC Advanced, GC Active or GC Learner (minimum requirement). Norway supports Global Compact. www.gcnordic.net/ www.unglobalcompact.org

Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) is the most widely used standard for reporting on CSR, and includes human rights indicators. There are three levels of reporting, from A, the most advanced, to C, the least advanced. Independent auditing/verification of the report earns a plus, making A+ the highest level. Norway supports GRI. CSR Norge maintains an overview of Norwegian companies that follow GRI, and regularly holds GRI Certified Training courses. www.globalreporting.orgwww.csrnorge.no

Guiding Principle 22

3.4 Grievance mechanisms for human rights violations [page 35]

The 22nd principle concerns remediation. Grievance mechanisms are described in chapter 4. It is important to distinguish between judicial and non-judicial mechanisms. Cases involving violations of national legislation are dealt with by the judicial system or the appropriate appeals body.

Guiding Principle 23

3.5 Compliance with legislation [page 36]

The 23rd principle concerns compliance with legislation. In some geographical areas, such as conflict-affected areas, a company may unintentionally enter into a business relationship with an enterprise, such as a security company, that is guilty of gross human rights abuses. In such a situation the Norwegian company should be aware that this may have legal consequences such as liability. The Norwegian Penal Code of 2005, which entered into force on 1 October 2015, also applies to certain punishable offences committed on behalf of an enterprise registered in Norway when the offence is also punishable under the law of the country where it has been committed.

Norwegian companies that are faced with demands from the authorities in the host country that appear to be in conflict with international guidelines are encouraged to contact either the nearest Norwegian mission or the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Examples of such situations are a demand for a bribe or a request to keep certain information secret.

Guiding Principle 25

4.1 State-based grievance mechanisms [page 40]

The 25th principle concerns the state’s overall responsibility to ensure a well-functioning remediation system. Principles 26–31 deal with what steps states and enterprises can take to ensure remediation.

Guiding Principle 26

4.1 State-based grievance mechanisms [page 40]

Judicial grievance mechanisms

The 26th principle concerns judicial mechanisms for addressing human rights abuses. Norway has comprehensive human rights legislation and legislation in other areas that is also applicable to CSR. We also have an effective judicial system, and the Norwegian law of damages provides for financial compensation or redress under certain conditions.

Norwegian companies may become involved in legal cases dealing with human rights abuses in the host country. If the case is to be brought before a Norwegian court, it must satisfy the requirement in the Dispute Act that the facts of the case ‘have a sufficiently strong connection to Norway’. In order to determine whether the connection is sufficiently strong, an overall evaluation must be made of all the circumstances in the case that includes both judicial and other relevant circumstances.24 There are also other conditions for bringing a case before a Norwegian court.It is important to ensure that individuals who feel that their rights have been violated have access to effective remedy. The Government will actively follow the international efforts to strengthen access to judicial grievance mechanisms at the national level.

Measures:

participate in international cooperation to ensure that victims of grave and systematic human rights violations as a result of business activities have access to effective remedy;

support the work headed by OHCHR to strengthen national judicial systems to protect the rights of the victims of grave and systematic human rights violations;

participate in the process in the Council of Europe on following up the recommendations of the UN Guiding Principles on access to effective remedies at national level.

Guiding Principle 27

Norway’s OECD National Contact Point [page 20]

As a member of the OECD, Norway is committed to promoting the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. The Guidelines were updated and adopted at the OECD Ministerial Council Meeting in May 2011. All OECD countries must appoint a National Contact Point that in addition to promoting the Guidelines provides on request assistance in specific instances of alleged non-observance of the Guidelines. The Contact Point is not a supervisory or control body, but provides advice and facilitates access to conciliation and mediation procedures. National Contact Points are also mandated to cooperate with each other on promoting the Guidelines. Norway’s Contact Point is appointed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in consultation with the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries and the Ministry of Finance, from candidates proposed by the social partners (the Confederation of Norwegian Enterprise (NHO) and the Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions (LO) and civil society (the Norwegian Forum for Environment and Development).

4.1 State-based grievance mechanisms [page 40]

State-based non-judicial grievance mechanisms

The 27th principle concerns public non-judicial grievance mechanisms.

Norway has a number of well-functioning institutions such as the Labour Inspection Authority, the Ombudsman for Children, the Consumer Ombudsman, the Equality and Anti-discrimination Ombudsman, the Norwegian Environment Agency and the Parliamentary Ombudsman for the Public Administration. There are also complaints mechanisms in connection with the rights of employees, children, women and men. For example, on the basis of the Environmental Information Act, the Appeals Board for Environmental Information handles appeals concerning rejected requests from private and public agencies for access to environmental information. The National Contact Point provides information on the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and the UN Guiding Principles. The Contact Point also deals with individual cases independently of the government. In line with the Guidelines, the parties to cases that come before the Contact Point are expected to participate in good faith during the procedure.

Guiding Principle 28

4.2 Non-state-based grievance mechanisms [page 41]

Principles 28–30 deal with non-state-based grievance mechanisms, such as those established by the business sector itself. These may be linked with an individual enterprise such as a factory, or take the form of schemes aimed at a particular local community. Other types of grievance mechanisms are available to companies through industry organisations or tripartite cooperation. The 28th principle concerns the state’s responsibility to facilitate the establishment of non-state-based grievance mechanisms. Norway supports the organisation Access Facility. Access promotes effective problem solving for company–community conflicts by providing a safe space for dialogue between companies, communities and governments. It has a global network of professional facilitators who help communities and companies find practical solutions. At present the network is supported by institutions in the following countries: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, the Philippines, India, Kenya, Nigeria, Peru, South Africa, Thailand, Uganda and the US. Norway is supporting the training of facilitators in 2015.

Guiding Principle 29

4.2 Non-state-based grievance mechanisms

Grievance mechanisms at company level [page 41]

The 29th principle concerns what companies themselves should do to ensure access to grievance mechanisms. Companies that discover or are made aware that they may cause or help to cause a violation of individuals’ rights should establish or participate in effective grievance mechanisms and engage in a dialogue with the interested parties. In this way the company may succeed in addressing potential problems before they can escalate into conflict. Norwegian companies are encouraged to actively share their experience of grievance mechanisms and dialogue with interested parties. The National Contact Point, in cooperation with enterprises that have made considerable progress in this area, can provide practical advice on the establishment of consultation and grievance mechanisms.

Guiding Principle 30

4.2 Non-state-based grievance mechanisms

Cooperation on grievance mechanisms [page 41]

The 30th principle concerns cooperation on ensuring access to grievance mechanisms. Norwegian companies should take steps, either alone or in cooperation with others, to ensure that their cooperation partners and suppliers provide access to effective grievance mechanisms where appropriate.

Guiding Principle 31

The 31st principle sets out criteria for ensuring the effectiveness of non-judicial grievance mechanism. The criteria are designed to ensure that those for whom the mechanism is intended are aware of it, have confidence in it and are in a position to use it. Companies that establish grievance mechanisms should familiarise themselves with the criteria and seek to satisfy them. The OECD National Contact Point Norway follows these criteria.